DTIC ADA442013: Streamflow Information for the Next Century A Plan for the National Streamflow Information Program of the U.S. Geological Survey

19 Pages·5.9 MB·English

by  Defense Technical Information Center

Streamflow Information for the Next Century
A Plan for the National Streamflow Information Program(cid:3)
of the(cid:3)
U.S. Geological Survey
(cid:3)
A Proposed Plan(cid:3)
To increase the level of streamflow information for National needs;(cid:3)
To improve the way streamgaging stations are funded and located;(cid:3)
Of new ways to collect, store, and distribute streamflow information.
(cid:3)
U.S GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
(cid:3)
Open-File Report 99–456
Report Documentation Page Form Approved
OMB No. 0704-0188
Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,
including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington
VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it

does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
1. REPORT DATE 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED
1999 N/A -
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER
Streamflow Information for the Next Century
5b. GRANT NUMBER
5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER
5e. TASK NUMBER
5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
U.S. Department of the Interior 1849 C Street, NW Washington, DC REPORT NUMBER
20240
9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)
11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT
NUMBER(S)
12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Approved for public release, distribution unlimited
13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
The original document contains color images.
14. ABSTRACT
15. SUBJECT TERMS
16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF 18. NUMBER 19a. NAME OF
ABSTRACT OF PAGES RESPONSIBLE PERSON

a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE SAR 18
unclassified unclassified unclassified
Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)
Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18
Streamflow Information for the Next
Century—A Plan for the National
Streamflow Information Program of
the U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99–456
A Proposed Plan
• To increase the level of streamflow information for National
needs;
• To improve the way streamgaging stations are funded and
located;
• Of new ways to collect, store, and distribute streamflow
information.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bruce Babbitt, Secretary
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Charles G. Groat, Director
Copies of this report available upon request from:
U.S. Geological Survey
Information Services
Box 25286
Federal Center
Denver CO 80225
For additional information about this report contact:
Chief, Office of Surface Water
U.S. Geological Survey
12201 Sunrise Valley Drive
Mail Stop 415
Reston VA 20192
CONTENTS
Introduction............................................................................................................................................................................ 1
A Proposed National Streamflow Information Program........................................................................................................ 3
Federal-Interest Streamflow Network.......................................................................................................................... 3
Other Federal Streamflow Interests............................................................................................................................. 5
New Funding Mechanism............................................................................................................................................ 5
A New Mode of Operation.......................................................................................................................................... 7
Protecting Stations from Floods.................................................................................................................................. 7
Intensive Data-Collection during Floods and Droughts.............................................................................................. 7
National Streamflow Assessments............................................................................................................................... 9
Enhanced Streamflow Information Delivery and Products.......................................................................................... 10
Data Processing and Dissemination System................................................................................................................ 12
New Technologies........................................................................................................................................................ 12
Summary................................................................................................................................................................................ 13
References.............................................................................................................................................................................. 13
FIGURES
1-5. Graphs showing:
1. Funding sources for USGS streamgaging stations for fiscal years 1974-99...................................................... 1
2. Annual loss of streamgaging stations with more than 30 years of record......................................................... 2
3. Flux of herbicides in runoff from the Flint River, Georgia from Tropical Storm Alberto, July 1994............... 9
4. Long-term changes in streamflow of the Sugar River in Wisconsin.................................................................. 9
5. Variation in estimates of the 100-year flood for two different time periods for the Chehalis River near
Grand Mound, Washington................................................................................................................................ 10
6. Map showing real-time flow conditions for gaging stations with 30 years of record or more................................... 11
7. Diagram showing USGS streamgaging station of the future...................................................................................... 13
TABLE
1. Base Federal-interest streamgaging goals, with levels of attainment in 1996 and number of
additional streamgaging stations required to meet goals......................................................................................... 4
CONTENTS III

Streamflow Information for the Next Century—
A Plan for the National Streamflow Information Program
of the U.S. Geological Survey
INTRODUCTION Hydrologic Hazards Science at the U.S. Geo-
logical Survey, National Research Council,
Since1889,theU.S.GeologicalSurvey(USGS)
1999, p. viii).
has operated a multipurpose streamgaging network
supported primarily by other Federal, State, and local In response to a recent Congressional request,
agencies. Streamgaging stations are the monitoring theUSGScompletedanevaluationoftheabilityofthe
tools used to track the flux of water and associated streamgaging network to meet Federal needs for
components in streams and rivers across the Nation. streamflow information (U.S. Geological Survey,
Streamflow data from them are used for planning and 1998). The report found that the degree of attainment
decisions related to agriculture, industry, urban water of the Federal needs rose steadily through the 1960s
supplies, navigation, riverine and riparian habitat, and and 1970s and then leveled off or declined. Some
flood hazard identification. The principles that have goals are now less well supported than in the 1950s
guided this national network are: and 1960s. During the 1990s, the number of stations
significantly decreased. Funding from the USGS has
• Many partners contribute funding for the operation
become a smaller and smaller component of the
of gaging stations to collaboratively achieve
collaborative network; the shrinking proportion of
Federal mission goals and the individual goals of
USGSfundingforthenetworkcontinuestoreducethe
the funding agencies.
abilityofthenetworktomeetFederalinterests(fig.1).
• All data are freely available to all partners and the
public.
• USGS operates the network on behalf of all part-
ners to achieve economy and standardization of
availability and quality of data.
Long-Term Funding Sources
These goals remain appropriate and applicable 100 Other Federal Agencies
State/Local
today. However, the multipurpose streamgaging 90 USGS Matching
Federal Program
80
network needs increased resources and reorientation
70
becauseofdeficienciesinthepresentnetworktomeet
s 60
Fniecdaetrioaln gtoecahlsn, oclhoagnyg, ianngd i nnestwru ompepnotrattuinoint iaens dto c oinmtem-u- Million 4500
grateourstreamflowdatawithinformationfromother 30
Federal agencies. 20
10
“StreamflowdatacollectedbytheUSGSfor 0
over 100 years and the modern water science 19741975197619771978197919801981198219831984198519861987198819891990199119921993199419951996199719981999
Years
and technology carried out by the WRD form
the cornerstone for national, regional, and
Figure 1.FundingsourcesforUSGSstreamgagingstations
localeffortstocopewithhydrologichazardsby for fiscal years 1974-99.
providing continued, up-to-date information
about water conditions and understanding of
hydrologic phenomena.” (From Preface,
Introduction 1
The number of gaging stations has declined for a decade, more and more costs
are borne by non-Federal partners, and the loss of stations with long-term
records is accelerating.
The present approach to providing streamflow and a public and scientific interest in long-term envi-
information is rapidly becoming inadequate and ronmental change. Beneficiaries for these uses are
unstable. The reasons relate to two fundamental oftendiffuse,andthustheservicesareunder-provided
changes that affect the network. The first change is because no one is prepared to step forward to pay for
that USGS funds have become a smaller share of the them. This is what economists call the “free rider
totalnetworkfunding,droppingfrom43to33percent, problem,”awell-knownissueintermsofprovisionof
respectively,betweenfiscalyears1974and1999.This government services.
has caused the network to be more vulnerable as New uses also arise from advances in tech-
funding partners consider their own specific needs. In nology.Inparticular,satellitetelemetryinconjunction
some cases, they have decided to do without the infor- with the use of the World Wide Web (WWW) has
mation or undertake alternative approaches that greatly enhanced the value of the data and also the
demand and expectations about its availability and
provide more limited information. For example, they
reliability. The Internet can now be used to provide
maydecide tomeasureflowsforonlypartoftheyear,
current data on floods and recreational flow condi-
or focus on low flows or high flows, or only provide
tions. However, these technologies have significant
stage data and not discharge. Costs can be lowered
infrastructurecostsanddemandalevelofreliabilityof
when they choose to not provide a capability for
service that was never before required of the USGS.
publicdataaccess,ortolimitaccesstoeitherreal-time
To make the present partners bear these costs alone,
or historical data. Costs can also be reduced by not
given that the benefits of the technologies are wide-
including quality assurance or by making fewer visits
spread, is unfair and unrealistic.
to inspect instruments and make discharge measure-
In addition to funding and infrastructure issues,
ments. These kinds of cost-cutting measures may be
other components of the network require reassess-
rational for the current needs of a partner agency.
ment.Theseincludedocumentingfloodsanddroughts,
However, from a national interest perspective they are
sub-optimal,becausewhatislostisapublicgoodthat
has wide applicability for many uses. The loss of 22
180
percent of the streamgaging stations that record flow
s
on small, free-flowing rivers since 1971 is one n160
o
example of the impact of the funding changes. This ati140
St
loss of streamflow information is compounded
g120
n
because often the discontinued streamgaging stations gi
a100
have long historical records, which are essential for g
m
effective assessment and planning of water-resources a 80
e
r
programs by Federal, State, and local governments St 60
(fig. 2). of
r 40
e
b
The second change is that the network now has m 20
u
a broader set of uses, but specific partners willing to N 0
supportthesenewuseshavenotemerged.Someofthe 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991
new uses arise from changes in society’s interests. Year
Theseincludetheneedforflowdatatosupport:water-
quality management, aquatic-habitat improvements, Figure 2. Annual loss of streamgaging stations with more
enhanced operations at dams, water-based recreation, than 30 years of record.
2 StreamflowInformationfortheNextCentury—APlanfortheNationalStreamflowInformationProgramoftheU.S.GeologicalSurvey
assessing streamflow trends, and developing systems parties. NSIP will consist of the following compo-
for improving the monitoring and dissemination of nents:
streamflow data and related information. Current
1. A nationwide system of Federal-interest stream-
opportunities to document the characteristics and
gaging stations for measuring streamflow and
distributions of floods and droughts are limited to
related environmental variables (precipitation,
those events when supplemental funds are appropri-
temperature) reliably and continuously in time;
ated after a Presidential Declaration of a Disaster.
2. Aprogramforintensivedatacollectioninresponse
USGS should have base funds for post-event data
to major floods and droughts;
collection to provide valuable information for charac-
terizing the events and to help mitigate the effects of 3. A program for periodic assessments and interpreta-
future events. Likewise, there is a need for ongoing tion of streamflow data to better define its statis-
assessments of streamflow data at the national and tical characteristics and trends;
regional level so that water-resource managers, plan- 4. A system for real-time streamflow information
ners, engineers, forecasters, and emergency manage- delivery to customers that includes data
ment officials have the most current statistical processing, quality assurance, archival, and
information on floods and droughts. The expanding access;
demand for real-time streamflow data and timely
5. Aprogramoftechniquesdevelopmentandresearch.
assessments of streamflow characteristics and trends
requires that new capabilities be developed both for Many of the features of NSIP are consistent
monitoring of conditions at field sites and for dissemi- with recent recommendations of the National
nating reliable and accurate data and results of assess- ResearchCouncil(1992,1999).Providingtimely,reli-
ments to many thousands of users nationwide. The able information that can be used for many decisions
approachesdescribedinthisreportattempttorespond by many parties is the goal of NSIP. The purpose of
to the changing circumstances of the streamgaging thisreportistodefineNSIPandgivethemotivationof
infrastructure in a way that serves both the specific its conceptual design and seek input from the many
needs of partners and the broader national interest for funding partners and users of streamflow information.
streamflow information. This process will lead to detailed funding and imple-
mentation plans for the NSIP.
A PROPOSED NATIONAL STREAMFLOW
Federal-Interest Streamflow Network
INFORMATION PROGRAM
Federal streamflow information needs are those
A USGS Committee reexamined its stream-
that should be met by the USGS streamgaging
gagingprogram,evaluatingnotonlythestreamgaging
network even in the absence of support from funding
stations but the full suite of products derived from the
partners. These include:
network. The Committee recommended initiating the
NationalStreamflowInformationProgram(NSIP). Compacts and Decrees for Interstate and
The NSIP will produce information for multiple uses, International Transfers (350 locations).
be shared freely, made readily accessible for current Interstate compacts, court decrees, and international
use,archivedforfutureuse,bequalityassured,andbe treaties mandate streamgaging by the USGS at State-
viewedasneutral,objective,andofhighqualitybyall line-crossings and other points of flow adjudication.
Federal streamflow information needs are those that should be met by the USGS
streamgaging network even in the absence of support from funding partners.
A PROPOSED NATIONAL STREAMFLOW INFORMATION PROGRAM 3
National Weather Service (NWS) Flood Forecasts network of streamgaging stations that are needed to
(2,950 locations served). supportthreenationalwater-qualitynetworksoperated
Real-time discharge and stage data are required in bytheUSGS.ThesenetworksaretheNationalStream
support of NWS river forecasts and flood warnings at Quality Accounting Network (NASQAN), a set of 40
service locations across the country. stations that cover the Nation’s largest rivers; the
National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) low-
Water Budgets (329 accounting units monitored).
intensity network, a set of 62 stations that cover inter-
Tracking and quantifying the volumes and flow rates
mediate-sizedrivers;andBenchmark,asetof48small
of water from upland watersheds to major rivers as it
pristine watersheds. The second component includes
moves through the drainage systems of the Nation to
locations where streamflow information is needed for
assist in national water assessments, planning studies,
planning and implementing restoration efforts to
and policy decisions.
improve water quality in those watersheds that are
Regionalization and Long-term Trends knowntohavedegradedwaterquality.Itisanticipated
(800 stations). this list will change over time as new information is
Regionalizationistheprocessofusingarepresentative obtained, but that there will be a continual need for
flow record as a surrogate for other locations where streamflow information in support of water-quality
streamgaging stations do not exist. It is the backbone improvement activities in about 700 watersheds
of USGS methods for estimating streamflow charac- nationwide.
teristics at ungaged locations. To reduce errors in
The list of Federal needs presented here and in
existing regional relations, and to estimate changes in
table 1 represents our view of the most important
flow characteristics that result from environmental
needs from a Federal perspective. Review and
changes, at least one streamgaging station is required
comment on this definition of core needs will be
for every unique ecoregion and water-budget
soughtfrommanystakeholdersandfromtheNational
accounting-unit combination in the Nation.
Research Council. Reactions to this definition of core
Water Quality (850 stations) needs must be made with the recognition that it repre-
The water-quality goal has been modified slightly sents a "floor" and not a "ceiling" for the needs that
from the Report to Congress to include two compo- should be addressed by a Federal streamgaging
nents. The first component is a minimal Federal network.
Table 1.Base Federal-interest streamgaging goals, with levels of attainment
in 1996 and number of additional streamgaging stations required to meet goals
Number of
Level of
additional
Number of attain-
stream-
sites or ment of
Base Federal Interest gaging
reaches to goal in
stations
be served 1996, in
needed to
percent
meet goal
Compacts and Decrees 350 56 150
NWS Flood-Forecast Sites 2950 73 800
Water Budgets 350 77 100
Long-term Changes 800 76 200
Water Quality 700 88 100
TOTAL 1,350
4 StreamflowInformationfortheNextCentury—APlanfortheNationalStreamflowInformationProgramoftheU.S.GeologicalSurvey